U.S. Supreme Court nominee Judge John G. Roberts Jr. testifies before Senate Judiciary Committee during confirmation hearings to be Chief Justice. (Rob Crandall/Shutterstock)
Sarah Burris is a long-time veteran of political campaigns, having worked as a fundraiser and media director across the United States. She transitioned into reporting while working for Rock the Vote, Future Majority and Wiretap Magazine, covering the Millennial Generation's perspective during the presidential elections. As a political writer, Burris has had bylines at CNN, Salon.com, BNR, and AlterNet and serves as a senior digital editor for RawStory.com.
Former senior prosecutor for the Justice Department, Andrew Weissmann, warned that the Supreme Court isn't following the law when it comes to the stay in the Donald Trump election case.
Speaking to MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace on Thursday, the NYU law professor compared it to Bush v. Gore, but not being slapped in the face with the verdict that picks the president. Instead, he said, it's now only a glimmer of hope that the case will happen at all.
"Everything has to come into play for there to be a trial where the facts will actually matter, and we don't have Donald Trump just spinning the public," Weissmann said. "Which is an extra extraordinary position. The Supreme Court has sided with Donald Trump on this case. It's obviously going to side with him in the Colorado case. And to the point that Liz Cheney was asked about what we could expect, obviously, Joe Biden won the election, and Donald Trump could still win, but I really don't have hope as to who would endorse the constitutional mechanism that there are only two terms."
Cheney posted on social media, “Delaying the January 6 trial suppresses critical evidence that Americans deserve to hear."
It was supposed to be at the Supreme Court, Weissmann explained, but they issued a "stay" in the case without "actually reaching any legal conclusions that you need to reach a stay. They basically kept the judge's case on ice, but they didn't do any of the things that the law requires to find that a stay is appropriate."
He said that a judge is "supposed to go through all sorts of factors," such as "that you would have a likelihood of success and there would be damage. They didn't do any of that. They just issued it."
It ultimately brings up questions of checks and balances, he said, noting that for the first time checks and balances are truly needed for someone like Trump.
"You particularly need it when you have a president like Donald Trump," he closed.